Wild Neighbors:The Humane Approach to Living with Wildlife ISBN 978-0-9748400-8-6

Wild Neighbors is a revision of Dr. John Hadidian's earlier book of the same title and I thought it appropriate to review this edition, having evaluated the earlier version for the National Animal Damage Control Association (no longer active). You can read my earlier review at UNL Digital Commons.

Readers will find the book an enjoyable read. The authors made sure the book was organized in a manner that aids reader understanding and use of the text. The book is organized into two parts. Part 1 addresses principles and major concepts related to human-wildlife interactions, such as law, diseases, and techniques. The authors also provide their philosophy of wildlife damage management which I shall assess below. Part 2 contains a series of chapters dedicated to species that are typically involved in conflicts with humans. These chapters as well as those in Part 1 are superbly written with an easy to understand prose. The authors did an excellent job avoiding complex sentences deciding instead to write in simple narrative. Each species chapter covers biology, range, habits, potential disease concerns, followed by a discussion of techniques the authors believe may help resolve the human-wildlife conflict in a way acceptable to them. Each species ends with a recommendation of books for further reading, if the authors found any that met their standards. The line drawings and figures included in the text are superbly done and add informative as well as aesthetic value to the book.

Unfortunately, the book's content is not so easily endorsed. However, there are a few elements worthy of praise. First, the authors summary of animal biology saves the book from being a total failure. Anyone interested in learning how to write about animal biology that is both accurate and enjoyable to read, should consult this book. Second, the book recommendations at the end of each of the species chapters is also a worthy benefit. With so many potential books available, it is always a better to obtain books that are recommended by people knowledgeable about wildlife biology.


The book's advice about resolving wildlife conflicts is woefully inadequate, at times naive, and generally dismissive of lethal control. Although the authors finally provided advice about how to kill rodents (something I noted was lacking in their first book), they seemed unwilling to accept the reality that many of their suggestions won't work to resolve wildlife conflicts. The authors repeatedly criticize lethal control techniques by insinuating that they are done simply because individuals fail to think creatively enough about possible alternatives. Ironically, it never seems to occur to the authors that their employer, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), should be spending its money in search of these so called "non-lethal' alternatives. With access to millions of dollars (their budget in 2006 was over 100 million dollars) one would expect that the HSUS should have plenty of money to fund research. I know I would like to actually read a book with fewer recommendations couched in tentative terms of may, could, and try. One should also mention that the authors do condemn some techniques not because they have proof of their being inhumane but because they "think" the techniques are inhumane (see p. 34). As stated above, I suspect they have the money to find out for sure, but it is doubtful that they will fund the research. 

The book contains a number of statements that conveniently neglect to provide the reader with the full context regarding wildlife damage management. For example, in the chapter on rats, they write "The usual consequence of killing rodents to suppress their population is the return, shortly, to their population level that prevailed before, or one slightly higher." They move on to say that if nothing is done to the underlying habitat then the cycle of killing followed by rat rebound will continue in an endless cycle. That is all true. What they neglect to mention is that the cost of regular control may be significantly less than the cost of implementing a long-term solution. I can buy a lot of toxicant over a lot of years if I can avoid spending 10,000 dollars to remove the underlying rodent conditions. In other words, just because something can be done does not mean that it is practical. Sometimes, the cure is worse than the disease. (The cost of owning a lawn means you have to mow it. Sometimes, the cost of certain habitats is that certain species (i.e. rats, mice) thrive to unacceptable levels). If the cost of removing the underlying conditions that feed rats ends up bankrupting you, then what is the benefit? I wonder what the HSUS authors think poor people, those that can't afford to implement expensive structural repairs to exclude rats and mice, should be required to do? Should they not have the ability to use inexpensive toxicants to control rats and mice because the HSUS decries their use? What about cities and towns? Aren't people's taxes high enough or should we increase them more to remove all of the underlying conditions which will only likely effect incomplete control. I recommend habitat modification as a control technique. However, I do not believe that it is non-lethal (contrary to these authors) nor do I think it is the full solution. Habitat modification must be part of control because I believe in Integrated Pest Management rather than condemning tools. All tools have their place, provided they haven't been completely supplanted by a better one, contrary to what the authors in this text claim.

The authors are quite right to assert that people need to be more tolerant of wildlife and work to prevent damage from happening. However, the authors also need to be more sympathetic to the myriad of ways property owners suffer damage from wildlife and how they need ways to resolve those conflicts that do not cost a fortune and work immediately.

In sum, readers wanting to know all the available techniques useful in resolving conflicts with wildlife so that they can make an informed choice, should look elsewhere (e.g. Prevention and Control of Wildlife Damage available for free at http://icwdm.org). 

Stephen M. Vantassel CWCP, ACP. is project coordinator for the Internet Center for Wildlife Damage Management (http://icwdm.org) and is an expert in helping people resolve wildlife conflicts.